Getting to Outcomes: An Approach
to Implementing Systemic Change
Anita P. Barbee, MSSW, Ph.D.
Consultant NRCOI and NCIC
Christine Tappan, MSW
Administrator, DCYF/DJJS Bureau of
Organizational Learning & Quality
Improvement
Outline of Talk
•
•
•
•
Background about the GTO model
What is GTO? Review of the model
Usefulness of GTO for child welfare, in general
Usefulness of GTO for practice model
installment and implementation, in particular
• Past experience installing and implementing
practice models in other states
• Experience of using GTO in New Hampshire
2
Background of GTO
• This framework is embedded in empowerment
evaluation theory (Fetterman & Wandersman, 2005)
and uses a social cognitive theory of behavioral change
(Ajzen & Fishbein, 1977, Bandura, 2004)
• It has the advantage of being a results -based
accountability approach to change that has been used
in smaller organizations to aid them in reaching desired
outcomes for clients in such areas as preventing
alcohol and substance abuse among teens as well as
developing assets for youth (Fisher, et al, 2007) and
teen pregnancy prevention (Lesesne et al, 2008).
3
Evidence of GTO effectiveness
• Using a longitudinal, quasi-experimental design,
Chinman et al (2008) examined the impact of
using GTO on improvements in individual capacity
to implement substance abuse interventions with
fidelity and on overall program performance in
programs that did and did not utilize a GTO
approach.
• They found the programs utilizing a GTO
approach performed significantly better at both
the individual and program levels than those that
did not utilize the GTO approach.
4
10 STEPS IN GETTING TO OUTCOMES
1) Identifying needs and resources,
2) Setting goals to meet the identified needs,
3) Determining what science based, evidence based (EBP) or evidenceinformed practices or casework practice models exist to meet the needs,
4) Assessing actions that need to be taken to ensure that the EBP fits the
organizational or community context,
5) Assessing what organizational capacities are needed to implement the
practice or program,
6) Creating and implementing a plan to develop organizational capacities in the
current organizational and environmental context,
7) Conducting a process evaluation to determine if the program is being
implemented with fidelity,
8) Conducting an outcome evaluation to determine if the program is working
and producing the desired outcomes,
9) Determining, through a continuous quality improvement (CQI) process, how
the program can be improved and
10) Taking steps to ensure sustainability of the program.
5
GTO Support System Model
Tools +
#2
Goals
To
Achieve
Desired
Outcomes
#3
Best
Practices
Training +
#4
Fit
#1
Needs/
Resources
Assessment
Current
Level of
Capacity
#5
Capacities
=
+
#10
Sustain
#6
Plan
#9
Improve/
CQI
QI/QA +
#8
Outcome
Evaluation
Actual
Outcomes
Achieved
#7
Implementation
& Process
Evaluation
TA +
6
Usefulness to Child Welfare
• Already the GTO model has been used to
implement programs to prevent teen
pregnancy, teen violence and teen substance
abuse, which are issues facing our clients.
7
Wandersman (2009): Keys to
intervention success
• Any effective model, program or intervention
must have four keys to success:
1) A theoretical base including a theory of change
2) A fully articulated set of actions and skills that
can be observed for presence and strength
3) System supports
4) Evaluation results including data benchmarks to
monitor the efficacy of the model
8
Usefulness of GTO to Practice Model
Installation and Implementation
• First let’s review what a practice model is
• Then we can go through examples of the
issues of installing and implementing a child
welfare practice model
• Then we can see some of the issues that get
agencies stuck in rolling out such a
complicated initiative
9
A child welfare casework practice
model
A practice model for casework management in
child welfare should be theoretically and values
based, as well as capable of being fully integrated
into and supported by a child welfare system. The
model should clearly articulate and operationalize
specific casework skills and practices that child
welfare workers must perform through all stages
and aspects of child welfare casework in order to
optimize the safety, permanency and well being
of children who enter, move through and exit the
child welfare system.
10
Theory of Practice
• Delineates how to think about or conceptualize the practice
with the population of focus. The theoretical foundation can
respond to four areas:
1) The conceptualization of the problem (e.g., child
maltreatment is embedded in the stage of a family’s life
development)
2) The change theory that informs how that problem can be
remediated (e.g., self efficacy theory)
3) The theory that guides the critical contribution and influence
of the relationship alliance or partnership (e.g., solution
focused theory)
4) The core practice values that underlie the approach to
clients and the problem (e.g. family centered or strengths
based).
11
Specific Skills
• A casework practice model should specify the practice skills that are
to be carried out and measured for fidelity and implementation
adherence. These include:
1) Core practice skills that guide practice across the life of a case
(e.g., engagement, assessment, planning, decision making) so that
even when there is no direction about a specific type of
encounter, the theory and meta-skills together can guide practice
2) Clearly specified and distinct practice skills for each stage of a
child welfare case including intake, investigation, in-home
services, placement into and monitoring of progress in out-ofhome care (reunification, foster care recruitment and certification,
adoption)
3) Specific skills for dealing with distinct family issues as child sexual
abuse, neglect, or domestic violence involvement.
12
Infrastructure to Support Practice and
Change Effort
• The third component involves the ability to create a system
infrastructure that supports and reinforces the theoretical orientation
and practice skills that are a part of the practice model. This would
include:
1) Policy, training, documentation requirements and forms, a SACWIS
System (IT)
2) Supervision and worker performance evaluations that align with the
casework practice model
3) Quality Assurance (QA) and continuous quality improvement (CQI)
processes that align with and evaluate adherence to the casework
practice model.
The importance of systems alignment and a list of drivers of systems
change has been supported by research in other fields of practice,
collected in the NIRN model (Fixsen,et al, 2005) and by research on
implementation in child welfare (Cahn, 2010).
13
Evaluation
• The fourth component involves development of data points
to monitor fidelity to the model and, once fidelity is
achieved, to evaluate the impact on outcomes, in this case
for children and families in the child welfare system.
1) Process or Implementation Evaluation assessing fidelity to
the model is essential before embarking on outcome
evaluation
2) Benchmarks important in child welfare would include the
federal Child and Family Services Review outcomes of
safety, permanency and well-being as well as other
intervening or process measures that may be relevant
(e.g. employee retention, engagement of community
partners, and so on).
14
Experiences Installing and
Implementing one Practice Model:
Solution Based Casework
•
•
•
•
Kentucky
Washington
Florida
New York City
15
Using GTO in New Hampshire:
Perspective of the State Administrator
and Evaluator
• Formation of an Implementation team
• Step 1 of GTO: Assessing Needs
o “What are the underlying needs and conditions that
must be addressed by the casework practice model?”
o This is a process of defining and framing the issue,
problem or condition.
o Usually, public child welfare agencies are faced with
failures in outcomes of safety, permanency and wellbeing among children who come into contact with the
child welfare agency.
16
Goal Setting
• Step 2 of GTO: Setting Goals
o “What are the goals and objectives that, if realized, will
address the needs and change the underlying conditions?”
o This, of course, is the process of identifying goals and
objectives for meeting the identified need and can quickly
lead to the search for information prescribed in the third GTO
step.
o Many states include these goals in their Program
Improvement Plan (PIP) or bi-annual Child and Family Service
Review (CFSR) or IV-B Plan or through a Consent Decree.
o This is where values of how to practice with families begin to
emerge. NH used a learning organization and solution focused
lens to approach changes in their child welfare system.
17
Choosing an EBP or EIP
• Step 3 of GTO: Choosing an evidence informed practice model
o “Which science- based, evidence -based or evidence- informed casework
practice models or best-practice programs can be used to reach our
goals?”
o To choose which casework practice model is best for the state and the
workforce that the state can afford, a review of the literature may yield
casework practice models that have evidence of positive impact for client
families.
o Ideally in this step, multiple models would be available to be studied and a
model could be chosen to address the identified needs and goals for
improvement.
o Consultants, national technical assistance providers from federal, private,
or philanthropic initiatives, and university partners may provide assistance
in identification of a practice model or a specific practice for a specific
issue.
o In the case of NH, Chris Tappan attended a talk by Anita Barbee about
Practice Models with an emphasis on Solution-Based Casework in May,
2010 for key training directors in New England.
18
Assessing Fit
• Step 4 in GTO: Assessing the fit of a model to the agency culture
o Leadership support is one of the first aspects of fit. In order to adopt a
casework practice model, agency leadership must make a clear
commitment to the model and express that commitment both inside
the organization and outside with external community partners (e.g.,
Martin, et al, 2002).
o This expressed commitment is facilitated by firsthand experience with
understanding the model from the beginning.
o In NH, Dana Christensen gave a presentation on SBC to leaders
and implementation team members which gave them a glimpse
of how certain segments of the system might react to the model
and its implications, hear answers to potentially challenging
questions, and understand important implementation
challenges as well as test its core strength of support.
19
Renaming or Expanding the Model
o “What actions need to be taken so that the selected program,
practice, or set of interventions fits our child welfare agency?”
o At this point, the organization has to assess adoption (fit) issues and
possible adaptations of parts of the model that are not core
components (Fixsen, et al, 2005).
o For example, the team may find a name that brands the model for
that state or jurisdiction, while still acknowledging the original
source, (e.g., SBC was called Family Solutions for a while in
Kentucky) or changing aspects of the existing model to
accommodate cultural groups which are particular to the state.
o For example Solution Based Casework was developed in Kentucky, a
state without any recognized tribes. When Washington state
adopted the SBC practice model, tribal input was included in the
process of implementation.
o NH also is incorporating Family Team Meetings into their new
practice model (as we did in Kentucky) – Known now as “SolutionBased Family Meetings”.
20
Recognition of Systems Change
o A significant challenge of this step is the stakeholder’s progressive
realization that in order to change practice in the field, so many aspects of
the system's infrastructure must change to facilitate the new practice.
o Many of these systems cannot be changed before those who would
change the systems fully understand the new practice and its implications.
o In every state, there has been a naturally occurring tension between the
need for infrastructure change (information systems, policy, supervision,
quality assurance), and the desire to train the personnel who provide the
direct practice.
o Training typically occurs first because
o 1) often the degree of system change is at first underestimated,
o 2) training is easier to accomplish quickly and improves worker acceptance of
infrastructure change, and
o 3) infrastructure change is more challenging due to costs, past financial
investment in old systems, and past administrative investment.
o In NH training occurred first but some systems changes were implemented
immediately. A clear communication plan about the roll out followed.
21
Assessing Organizational Capacity
• Step 5 of GTO: Assessing Organizational
Capacities
o This includes assessing the organizational
capacity for change in two major areas:
o The human capacity (identifying potential champions
for the change, as well as clinical skills of staff, as well
as where resistance may lie) and
o The organizational capacity (facilitators of change, and
barriers to change), referred to by other models
(Fixsen, et al, 2001) as ‘infrastructure’ changes.
22
NCIC Support and Culture and Climate
Assessment
• In NH, the implementation of the practice model coincided with an
Implementation Project sponsored by the NCIC with funding from
the Children’s Bureau.
• Early adopters were trained in the model to spread the “good
news” about SBC.
• In addition, The assessment of human resource capacity should
include an assessment of the clinical skills of workers and their
ability to implement the casework model as designed.
• Some providers have the characteristics of self efficacy, openness to
change, and readiness to implement a practice model and some do
not, thus an assessment of readiness/openness to EBP (Aarons,
2004) and a readiness to learn (Coetsee, 1998) should be conducted
as a part of the early organizational culture and climate check.
• In NH such an assessment of organizational culture and climate was
conducted.
23
Organizational Capacity
• Organizational capacity must be assessed for the ability to support the
casework model. It is in this phase that the stakeholder team may need to
work on ways to help the agency
1) enhance agency and system leadership, particularly help leaders create
a vision and support for the change effort,
2) assess and help to change the organizational culture so that it is a
learning environment that is open to and ready for change,
3) engage, train, and retain a more qualified and motivated workforce
using participatory approaches such as appreciative inquiry (Cooperrider,
1996) and empowerment evaluation (Fetterman & Wandersman, 2005) to
achieve the support needed for transformational change,
4) build cross-functional and cross-organizational teams to achieve change
in policy, practice, process, and personnel,
5) identify the resources and other infrastructure to bring about the
change on top of day to day duties, and
6) communicate results of quality improvement and change efforts to
continue the momentum of these efforts.
• NH had a healthy organization and capacity in place to implement a new
practice model
24
Resources
• Another part of assessing capacity is to find the organizational
resources that will be needed to implement the plan. It is here that
the child welfare organization will need to study how to adapt
systemically to the needs of the new practice model by making
progress on the time-consuming infrastructure changes. Some of
the issues that typically emerge are the
a) financial and personnel resources to support the new practice,
b) rewriting of policy,
c) criteria revisions for quality assurance and CQI procedures, and
d) model- specific training for administrators, managers, and front line
supervisors.
• In NH the IP through NCIC helped with resources and policy, QA and
CQI are adjusting to adapt to the new model.
• In addition NH conducted special training for all levels of the
organization with a coaching/case consultation reinforcement
component to ensure supervisors are helping workers change
practice. Changes in SACWIS will come later.
25
Planning
• Step 6 of GTO: Implementation Planning Steps
o The assessments will lead the implementation team to the
development and implementation of two specific and long
range plans:
1) a plan to train and maintain staff competency in the new
practice model, and
2) a plan for infrastructure change to support the new
practice model.
Typically, jurisdictions quickly recognize the need for the
first (training staff). However, it is equally important (and
more difficult) to develop and implement a plan for the
related agency infrastructure changes necessary to support
the practice model (e.g. changes in policy, information
systems, quality assurance, and staff evaluation). NH
created both plans.
26
Stages of Training the Model Across
the System
1) Train Leadership
2) Development of a comprehensive transfer of
training program
• A training of trainers (TOT) and/or a training of
key experts who will provide mentoring on the
use of the model, reinforce key concepts in the
model and trouble-shoot where questions and
concerns are raised must be conducted to insure
that internal expertise is developed. These can be
supervisors, managers, workers and trainers.
In NH these consist of trainers, supervisors and
administrators
27
Training (continued)
3) A pilot group of front line supervisors needs to be
trained so they can become coaches to other
supervisors and workers
4) Train the pilot front line workers in the practice
model and reinforce through case consultation with
their pilot supervisors
• In NH, training of both supervisors and staff occurred
statewide, and more certification is occurring first in
PIP designated “Advanced Practice Sites”.
28
Training (continued)
5) Train the remainder of the supervisors in both
the practice model and the case consultation
model as well as the front line workers
• At this point the new worker training and other
support trainings need to be revised to
incorporate the practice model
• That is what NH did once everyone was trained.
They also are aligning their training evaluation
across trainings with an emphasis on assessing
knowledge and skill development in the model
and transfer of learning to the field.
29
Training (continued)
6) Evaluate the training and case consultation to
ensure learning and transfer are occurring. This
helps in establishing fidelity to the model.
• As noted before, NH is expanding their training
evaluation to align with the new model and its
implementation
7) Training of and giving presentations to
community partners to engage them in the new
practice.
• NH involved CASA, Resource Parent Training, the
Courts and Juvenile Justice
30
Plans for Changing the Infrastructure
• Use outside funds, reallocate existing funds,
ask for additional funds to ensure that the
financial and personnel resources that are
needed can be put into place
• Re-write policy
• Increase and modify the curriculum and
delivery mode of training (provide materials
for learning, coaching and mentoring)
• Conduct evaluation
• Educate other organizational partners
31
Change the Computer System
– Computer and paper systems that support practice need to
change to accommodate the new practice model.
– New forms, assessment tools, case planning tools (e.g.
prevention plans, safety plans, in home treatment plans, out of
home care plans, aftercare plans), case monitoring or progress
tracking tools, and closure tools need to be modified or added
and old tools need to be deleted so that the new ways of
practice are not competing with the old ways.
– It has been our experience that forms play an underestimated
role in shaping worker behavior in the field. Workers tend to
gravitate their sequencing of questions based upon the order of
the form they are filling out, or will have to fill out once back in
the office.
– It is better to change the form to be conceptually consistent
with the practice model than to expect to train the worker to
resist the structuring pull of the old form.
NH has redesigned the Bridges (SACWIS) system to drive a SBC lens
from SDM through the “life of a case”. Rollout fall 2012
32
Change the CQI/QA tool and
potentially increase CQI case reviews
The CQI/QA system needs to align the case review tool, not only with the
CFSR tool, but also with the new casework practice model components.
• The new practice model components should be incorporated into the case review
tool. This is essential for measurement of:
a) the fidelity of daily practice to the model,
b) the impact of adherence to the model on outcomes of safety, permanency, and
well-being,
c) the levels of adherence to the model statewide and by area, county, team, and
individual which will, in turn, aid in determining training and supervision needs,
and
d) the impact of the model on outcomes.
• In order to have enough data to track adherence and outcomes, some states may
need to conduct CQI case reviews more frequently in order to have enough data to
make judgments about how the process is going. An inexpensive way to do this is
to involve front line supervisors and specialists as well as quality assurance
personnel in a randomized case review process.
NH is incorporating measures of the practice model into their case review
Tool by August 2012. Case Practice Reviews occurring in 2012 have already
shown increased levels of family engagement as measured by the OSRI.
33
Assessment and Realignment of
Caseload and Workload
• A final but critical infrastructure issue that must be considered is worker
caseload size and overall workload.
• A study of caseload including creation of a complex formula to assess
caseload (for example taking into consideration the number of front line
workers that are on leave or out for disciplinary measures) and workload
sizes (for example assessing the number of out of home care cases
workers are carrying as well as number of additional tasks a worker is
executing above those in their caseload) may need to be enacted in order
to assure that each worker meets the standards that produce the best
outcomes in their state or the CWLA standards for caseload size (CWLA,
2008).
In NH the organizational climate and culture study found workers were not
overly stressed and that the workload was not overly burdensome.
Continuing to monitor with annual survey under guidance of Workforce
Development Committee and PM Evaluation Team.
34
Process or Implementation Evaluation
• Step 7 of GTO: Process Evaluation. While the practice model is
being piloted and rolled out across the state, there needs to be a
process evaluation to answer questions such as,
o “Is the practice model being implemented as it was intended?
o Is the practice model being implemented with fidelity?
o Who adheres to the practice model and who does not adhere?
o Do those who adhere differ in any significant way from those that
do not adhere? How do they differ? Is the difference based on
something inherent in the worker such as intelligence, motivation,
personality or general skills (e.g., interpersonal skills)?
o Is the difference based on something about the situation such as
supervisor support, caseload size, team support, or lack of resources
in the agency or community?”
o The organization may need to go back to Step 5 if there are
problems at this step.
o NH began the process evaluation immediately and is expanding it
to assess fidelity to the model
35
Outcome Evaluation
• Step 8 of GTO: Outcome Evaluation.
o The agency must invest in an outcome evaluation to
confirm the expectation of improved positive outcomes
when the practice model is adhered to in each case with
high levels of fidelity (setting a cut off of 70% adherence on
the fidelity measure).
o The outcome evaluation can answer “How well is the
practice model working?
o What is the impact of the practice model on worker
retention?
o What is the impact of the pm on child safety, permanency
and well-being, family preservation and self sufficiency?”
o NH is developing their outcome evaluation research design
now and will begin to implement the study once fidelity is
assessed.
36
Continuous Quality Improvement
• Step 9 of GTO: Continuous Quality Improvement
o Process and outcome evaluation, along with the CQI process
of case reviews, can help the agency engage in continuous
improvement of the model (e.g., Deming, 1986).
o Stakeholders should be asking at this step, “How can the
practice model be improved?
o How can the implementation of and adherence to the
practice model be improved?”
o The results of the CQI can be used to answer these questions
if the results are fed back to all stakeholders.
NH is building in assessment of the PM into its ongoing
CQI process to embed checking for fidelity and outcomes
into the work.
37
Sustaining the Practice
• Step 10 of GTO: Sustaining the practice.
o Finally, the stakeholder committees must plan for
sustainability, particularly in light of the fact that
child welfare agency leaders turn over on average
every two years.
o If the practice model and its execution are
successful, how will the initiative, and use of the
practice model be sustained?
o Good measurement at steps 7, 8 and 9 help to
ensure sustainability
o Engagement of other stakeholders imperative
38
Applying the
GTO Model in
New Hampshire
39
“This is not a new
initiative…
it will be our way of life”
Maggie Bishop, NH DCYF Director May 2009
40
Assessing Needs and Resources:
Steps to Change
• 2009: Child Protective Services
Supervisors recognized the need
for a “model of practice”
• 2009: Agency dialogue with
Juvenile Justice “partners”
expanded
• 2009: Child and Family Services
Plan started a vision
• 2010: CFSR Statewide Assessment
gave us critical insight
• 2010: NCIC established sustained
implementation projects=
support/expertise available
• 2010: CFSR Outcomes gave us the
critical data and NOW the
PIP=PM
41
http://cbexpress.acf.hhs.gov/index.cfm?event=website.viewPrinterFriendlyArticle&articleID=3265
42
New Hampshire DCYF/DJJS Practice Model Design & Implementation Project Logic Model
Strategies
Improve the quality and
consistency of child welfare
practice through the
articulation and
implementation of a practice
model.
Activities
Establish a Practice Model Design Team,
comprised of DCYF frontline staff, to
create the practice model.
Collect information and research about
case practice approaches to inform
Design Team’s work.
Seek input from district office staff to
refine practice model.
Vision
Our Practice Model
will enhance the
quality and
effectiveness of child
welfare throughout
the State of New
Hampshire by
establishing a shared
vision, consistency in
practice and policy
statewide,
standardization of
permanency practices
and improvement of
the accountability of
those carrying out
child welfare services
across the state.
Strengthen DCYF’s family
engagement practice, family
engagement in decisionmaking and service utilization
Implement training & coaching program
for all district office staff and supervisors
as well as central office staff and
managers.
Develop and implement a
Communications Plan.
Obtain input and support
from parents, youth, and
stakeholder groups statewide
throughout the design and
implementation process.
Modify organizational
structures (policy, training,
quality assurance, reporting
etc) to support
implementation and longterm sustainability of the
practice model.
Strengthen DJJS’ permanency
practice.
Identify sources of input and the DCYF
managers who will obtain it.
Identify key points for sharing drafts for
feedback and clear pathways for
providing and using input.
Ensure staff from key organizational
functions attend Design Team meetings
to listen for implications for
organizational change.
Develop and test draft policies, reports,
curricula with the Design Team.
Engage youth and parent as codevelopers of policies.
Develop a strategy for engaging DJJS staff
in developing and implementing a
permanency practice.
Develop a Practice Model Design Team
for DJJS
Outputs
Practice Model Developed
by Design Team.
Beliefs, Guiding Principles
and Strategies articulated to
all DCYF and DJJS Staff.
Revised policies are
implemented across DCYF
and DJJS to reflect the
Practice Model.
BQI measures and reports
are revised and distributed.
Consistent permanency
practices and a consistent
family engagement model
will be developed/adopted
by DCYF and DJJS.
Training curricula revised or
developed to train all staff
on the Practice Model.
DCYF and DJJS staff and
supervisors trained in the
Practice Model.
Focus groups utilized to
gather feedback from all
DCYF and DJJS stakeholders.
Providers trained in the
Practice Model.
DJJS determined how
Practice Model will be
implemented with a focus
on permanency.
DJJS Design Team
coordinate with original
Design Team to ensure that
New Hampshire has one
consistent Practice Model.
Consistent Training and
Policies on Documentation
will be implemented
throughout DJJS.
Outcomes
The Practice Model is implemented
consistently by DCYF and DJJS in all
district offices.
DCYF and DJJS Staff and Supervisors
are proficient with Practice Model
tools & approaches.
Permanency Practices will be
standardized across DCYF and DJJS.
DCYF’s and DJJS’s Community
stakeholders understand and
support NH’s Practice Model.
DCYF and DJJS use a variety of
methods to continually assess and
improve consistency of practice,
effectiveness of family engagement
strategies, and professional
development.
DCYF and DJJS organizational
structures, policies and procedures
are aligned to support the Practice
Model’s sustainability.
Improvement in outcomes related to
effective child welfare practice (e.g.
all children/youth have permanency
plans, lower re-entry rates, higher
reunification rates, reduced average
length of stay in foster care, fewer
average number of foster care
placements, increased family
engagement, improved outcomes on
family satisfaction surveys, proper
youth supervision will be achieved via
Supervision Matrix (DJJS)).
DJJS staff have skills & knowledge to
engage families and implement
effective permanency plans.
DJJS’s utilization of the Practice
Model’s family engagement
strategies will decrease recidivism
and re-entry and increase
43
permanency.
Cross-Functional Project Teams
Communication Team
Members
& roles
defined
Evaluation Team
Policy Team
Training Workgroup
Sustainability
linkages
identified from the
beginning
Project Team
Design
Team
44
 Staff from across the agencies
 Application and selection
 Monthly works sessions and
homework in between
 Commitment to a decisionmaking process
 “Spread” leader
 Sustained engagement
 Youth and parent team members
45
46
47
48
Step 5: Assessing Organizational Capacities in NH
• “Leadership” – authorized
change - and asked for it to
be owned at all levels!
– Everyone is a potential leader
of change
– Everyone needs to be
prepared to envision change
and understand their role
– Set expectations
– Explored Challenges to
change
 Design Team application and
selection process
 Design Team members responsible
for local facilitation of change
 Project Team members assigned
areas of responsibility for change, i.e.
Communication Team, WorkForce
Development Committee,
Organizational Learning and Training
Team, Evaluation Team
 Supervisors – Supervisor Training
 “Organizational Readiness” Survey
 All staff “Readiness for Change”
training
49
50
 Transparency
 Feedback loops
 More is better
 Use varying approaches
 Go to the people
 Demonstrate passion!
 Youth, parents and staff tell
the story best!
 Partnerships are critical to
success
51
PIP = PM
Crazy!!
 Dedicated
agency staff
time
 Project
Consultants
 Combined
agency and
NCIC funding
 Long term
view of
sustainability
drives
agency
PRACTICE
52
 Exploration & Installation
Leadership
Cross-Functional Project Team
Communication
Resources
 Implementation
Leadership
Communication
Cross-Functional Team
Resources
Coaching
 Sustainability
Implementation plus
Sustained Coaching,
Communication & “Ownership”
Culture & Climate Monitoring,
Support & Resources
Frequent Monitoring and
Evaluation
53
References
• For references, see the document upon which
this talk is based:
Barbee, A. P., Christensen, D., Antle, B.,
Wandersman, A. & Cahn, K.(2011). Successful
adoption and implementation of a
comprehensive casework practice model in a
public child welfare agency: Application of the
Getting to Outcomes (GTO) model. Children
and Youth Services Review, 33, 622-633.
54
Contact Information
Anita P. Barbee, MSSW, Ph.D.
Professor, Kent School of Social Work
University of Louisville
Louisville, KY 40292
anita.barbee@louisville.edu
Christine Tappan, MSW, CAGS
Administrator, DCYF/DJJS
Bureau of Organizational Learning & Quality Improvement
Christine.Tappan@dhhs.state.nh.us
55